“Bisexual money-grubber with Asperger’s”: How to troll Anonymous

A "leaked" 8 page "psych profile" on top Anons purports to come from the FBI— …

A "leaked" FBI psychological profile of the Anonymous leadership has been making the rounds online for the last few weeks; it popped up again today at "Anon Central." The document purportedly profiles the six "leaders" of Anonymous, even ranking them at times, but its psych profiles would seem to fit every negative stereotype of hackers—right down to the "possible Aspergers syndrome," "amorality," and "social ineptness."

Oh, and did we mention the "bisexuality" and the greed?

The eight-page document allegedly comes from the FBI's Behavioral Sciences Unit at Quantico. It claims to have been written in August 2011 at some point between the arrest of Anonymous spokesperson Topiary in the UK and the arrest of "16 year old girl" (but probably a boy... or two) Kayla. The analysis says it is based on Twitter accounts and IRC chat logs, even though the document recognizes that certain screen names may be used by more than one person. Still, "as an aggregate, the data presented and assessed gives the BSU some confidence in the data presented here."

Is the "leaked" FBI report genuine? It looks decent enough on the surface, but such things are simple to forge. I spoke with the FBI about the document; they were unwilling to offer any comment on its provenance, but they could not say it's a hoax, either. Caveat lector.

Multiple points in the document ring false. It has occasional typos, for one thing. It uses single quotes on some pages and double quotes on others. The section called "Anonymous Collective Background" comes from Wikipedia. The doc seems ignorant of obvious facts, such as the link between the "JoePie91" screen name and Dutchman Sven Slootweg. Nearly all factual information in the document has already been made public. And most of the "character traits" read suspiciously like trolls ("bisexual," "pseudo-intellectual," "monetarily driven," "Aspergers syndrome").

Let's run down the list of the six named Anons, all of whom are familiar names from our own research into the group (and most of whom were involved in the HBGary hacks earlier this year) before considering who might have authored such a document. Anonymous, here's a master class on how to get trolled.

Sabu

Since Topiary's arrest, Sabu has become more of a spokesperson for Anonymous. The report suggests that he "has character traits of a professional adult individual who puts on the guise of a ‘script kiddie’ in language (netspeak) but functions within his normal day-to-day life within the business community without casting any clues to his other online activities.”

Key findings:

Likely married and employed in the technology sector

Has amoral tendencies and sees the world from a nihilistic perspective

Shows narcissistic tendencies

Spelling correction on chat logs shows compulsive behaviors

Prideful and likely easily prone to reaction through manipulation

Lives out rich fantasy life online (feeling important and empowered)

According to his "slang and diction," he's an American male, and probably between 29 and 35 years old. (Our favorite part? Spelling corrections as compulsive behavior. We call that "editing.")

Kayla

Kayla claimed to be a key player in the HBGary hacks earlier this year. The report notes Kayla's claim to be a girl but says that “intelligence gathered places the sex of the UNSUB [unknown subject] as male," and two males apparently linked with the Kayla screen name have in fact been arrested recently.

Kayla is:

Possibly bisexual

Likely abuse as a child

Likely inferiority complex due to childhood trauma

amoral personality traits

Attention seeking personality seeking father figure approval

Possible persistent drug use

The report suggests that Kayla can be “easily pushed to anger” and that this should be used by investigators “as frequently as possible to make him react and thus potentially slip up in anger.”

The report says that Kayla is a male, age 22-27, who lives in Middle America—but the actual arrests were of a 20- and 24-year-old in the UK.

Topiary

The report says it was compiled shortly after the arrest of one Jake Davis in the UK's Shetland Islands this summer. Investigators believe Davis to be “Topiary," and after his arrest he was transferred to London for an initial court hearing. At that hearing, he carried a book "on revolutionary scientists and made sure that the press could see this as a means to show his point of view and defiance of the common laws.”

Unlike the other top leaders profiled in the report, Davis is said to be an idealistic “true believer” and an altruist. Other Anons have used him as "cannon fodder," however, in their chaotic war on authority.

Davis is said to be "socially inept and withdrawn" and has "possible Aspergers syndrome."

JoePie91

JoePie91 is said to be "third in command" of the main Anonymous cell, though the report recognizes there may be others. He's "intelligent and well spoken” and “makes relevant arguments in correct grammatical syntax"—the bar for being a genius Anon is not apparently high, according to the report.

His words and grammar suggest that he may be an EU resident, and is likely a college student. Though he claims to operate in support role rather than actually breaking the law, the report suggests he also possesses “amoral character traits and personal beliefs.”

Tflow

Tflow, assumed to be a 22-26 year old male living in the US, "shows a more mercenary approach to the LulzSec and Anonymous campaigns." The report speculates that his motivations are financial, and that he may in fact be a paid hacker for Anonymous.

Key traits:

Pseudo-intellectual that lacks true educational background

Monetarily driven

Likely has a criminal history

Has cognitive dissonance over hactivism and activism

Since he allegedly runs many of the technical operations for Anonymous, the report suggests he “may be the linchpin to attack.” It also believes that he may be “easily turned against the group due to his cognitive dissonance over hacktivism as well as he [sic] desires for monetary gain."

"Out of control"

As for Anonymous itself, the report concludes with an apocalyptic assessment of the movement that suggests it cannot long endure.

The movement is out of control and there seems to be no real coherent motivation

The leaders have begun to hide themselves a bit more due to arrests that have been made

The reliance on technology will eventually be their downfall

Their interpersonal relationships are weak points, as such they should be leveraged

Their increasing attacks on infrastructure will eventually lead to serious results that could in fact lead to deaths

After such deaths, the report concludes that Anon activity may taper off "as the members realize that by outing individuals, actual physical actions can occur that cause great damage.”

The document reads like a more fully-fleshed out version of HBGary Federal CEO Aaron Barr's plan to map the Anonymous leadership—a plan that didn't turn out so well for him. But Barr was fingering people like "Owen" and others whom the new report ignores, and indeed many of Barr's so-called "top leaders" apparently weren't.

Advanced trolling?

Brown tells me that the report seems "off" based on his own associations with the people mentioned in the piece, including the fact that JoePie91 doesn't hide his identity. The goal seems to be "making Sabu and other figures look bad," he says, though in a "ham-fisted way."

We think it's a work of fiction, but an entertaining read nonetheless, one that even features "CIs" (informants) and IRC channels crawling with federal agents (a persistent Anon fantasy). But it took a fair bit of time to put together, and the question remains: who is trolling whom? Are Anons punking the world by putting their own stereotypes into the mouths of FBI agents? Are Anon's enemies just heckling the group? Or—what might be scariest of all—could the FBI possibly be producing material of this caliber?

Brown's best guess is that it was written by someone with an axe to grind. Of course, this being Anonymous, "there are just too many of these people out there to keep count," he says.

So the trolls are being trolled by (possibly) the trollees? Its possible however that the trolls are trolling the trollee by trolling themselves. Additionally, this could be a whole group/person who are trolling both the trolls and the trollee....

So the trolls are being trolled by (possibly) the trollees? Its possible however that the trolls are trolling the trollee by trolling themselves. Additionally, this could be a whole group/person who are trolling both the trolls and the trollee....

And further down the rabbit hole we go!

This is somewhat like the media coverage of Paris Hilton or Snookie. They're idiots who do dumb things and for some reason people like to pay attention to them. Everyone else just wonders why anyone cares.

Multiple points in the document ring false. It has occasional typos, for one thing. It uses single quotes on some pages and double quotes on others. The section called "Anonymous Collective Background" comes from Wikipedia. The doc seems ignorant of obvious facts, such as the link between the "JoePie91" screen name and Dutchman Sven Slootweg. Nearly all factual information in the document has already been made public. And most of the "character traits" read suspiciously like trolls ("bisexual," "pseudo-intellectual," "monetarily driven," "Aspergers syndrome").

Having read more than a few (non-classified) government communiques in my time, I can absolutely buy the misspellings, misuse of quotes, and grocers' apostrophes (sorry, grocer's apostrophe's). They even cast doubt on the nature of a large forgery/trolling operation itself: if you're going to go ahead with such an inflammatory hoax, wouldn't you at least attempt to match the commonly-assumed level of attention to detail we normally expect from law enforcement? Then again, perhaps they were thinking that we would think *that* and did it anyway. Or that they expected us to think that so we would think they'd think that and I'm pretty sure I just pooped in my head.

Yes. If you suffer from money-grubbing, Aspergers, bisexuality, or pseudo-intellect, ask your doctor if twice daily Trollz0rs is right for you!

Trollz0rs is not for everyone. Do not take Trollz0rs if you are nursing, pregnant, may become pregnant, or have ever been with a woman whose name didn't end in .jpg. Side effect include itching, dry mouth, rage, hypertension, and violent death. If you experience these symptoms, disconnect form the internet and see a real doctor immediately.

Psychological profiling is right up there with astrology and phrenology in terms of validity and accuracy. Contrary to what you see in TV shows, profilers have a success rate which is pretty much in line with chance, which means that you could replace all profilers with a random-number generating machine and get the same success rates...

Psychological profiling is right up there with astrology and phrenology in terms of validity and accuracy. Contrary to what you see in TV shows, profilers have a success rate which is pretty much in line with chance, which means that you could replace all profilers with a random-number generating machine and get the same success rates...

If it makes our intarwebz police feel better about themselves, why not? Keep in mind that all that money wasted to ''police'' the internet is for our own good! Think about the children!

Psychological profiling is right up there with astrology and phrenology in terms of validity and accuracy. Contrary to what you see in TV shows, profilers have a success rate which is pretty much in line with chance, which means that you could replace all profilers with a random-number generating machine and get the same success rates...

Psychological profiling is right up there with astrology and phrenology in terms of validity and accuracy. Contrary to what you see in TV shows, profilers have a success rate which is pretty much in line with chance, which means that you could replace all profilers with a random-number generating machine and get the same success rates...

Yeah, I'm surprised that the article didn't push that idea more. I could totally see some FBI guy making this and "leaking" it to annoy Anon. I know law enforcement have long used "trolling" (though usually in real life) to get a suspect to react.

Yeah, I'm surprised that the article didn't push that idea more. I could totally see some FBI guy making this and "leaking" it to annoy Anon. I know law enforcement have long used "trolling" (though usually in real life) to get a suspect to react.

So do politicians for that matter. The concept isn't new or novel. It's just that we've labeled it and are acknowledging it more as a society.

Having read more than a few (non-classified) government communiques in my time, I can absolutely buy the misspellings, misuse of quotes, and grocers' apostrophes (sorry, grocer's apostrophe's). They even cast doubt on the nature of a large forgery/trolling operation itself: if you're going to go ahead with such an inflammatory hoax, wouldn't you at least attempt to match the commonly-assumed level of attention to detail we normally expect from law enforcement? Then again, perhaps they were thinking that we would think *that* and did it anyway. Or that they expected us to think that so we would think they'd think that and I'm pretty sure I just pooped in my head.

I thought the same thing. Also, I'm not sure if I agree with the article title, since it makes no evidence of anybody actually being trolled.

That's weird, my own findings about Kayla tell the opposite story: Straight, confident about her sexuality and not homophobic either Healthy upbringing by loving and respectful parents, Montessori and Scandinavian blooming education Wholesome and upright mind and spirit Never committed any illegal act, never even crossed her mind Motherly middle-aged figure of authority, probably works as a judge, mayor or school principal Use aspirin a few times a year, and mountain hiking when she needs to get high Definitely a woman, changing your persona's gender is just too obvious Lives in a very traditional rural county in the Old World, possibly Switzerland or Austria Oh, and of course, watches all CSI and other TV shows about FBI and criminal profiling

Yes. If you suffer from money-grubbing, Aspergers, bisexuality, or pseudo-intellect, ask your doctor if twice daily Trollz0rs is right for you!

Trollz0rs is not for everyone. Do not take Trollz0rs if you are nursing, pregnant, may become pregnant, or have ever been with a woman whose name didn't end in .jpg. Side effect include itching, dry mouth, rage, hypertension, and violent death. If you experience these symptoms, disconnect form the internet and see a real doctor immediately.

I am disappointed that this seemed to slip through the cracks, and must quote it for great justice.

What's the deal with 'bisexual'? I mean, if it said "fag", that would be one thing but as a bisexual I can't conceive of someone calling me a bisexual with the intent of that reflecting bad on me. There's a disconnect there somewhere.

Trollz0rs is not for everyone. Do not take Trollz0rs if you are nursing, pregnant, may become pregnant, or have ever been with a woman whose name didn't end in .jpg. Side effect include itching, dry mouth, rage, hypertension, and violent death. If you experience these symptoms, disconnect form the internet and see a real doctor immediately.

I lol'd.

"Anonymous, here's a master class on how to get trolled."Oooooooh, is dem fightin words?...inb4 404

Yeah, I'm surprised that the article didn't push that idea more. I could totally see some FBI guy making this and "leaking" it to annoy Anon. I know law enforcement have long used "trolling" (though usually in real life) to get a suspect to react.

So do politicians for that matter. The concept isn't new or novel. It's just that we've labeled it and are acknowledging it more as a society.

If people in general start to learn how to identify and react appropriately to 'trolling' behaviour (whether it's from some kid on the internet, or from established political figures), then that might be something I could consider as 'good' arising from all these Anonymous shenanigans.